I think it is a bit unrealistic to expect an upgrade of an older version of Lr for a new camera.

You buy a new camera for more than 3 grand and don't want to shell out $ 79 for an upgrade to Lr4?

Just think of the upgrade as a necessary accessory for your new camera.

VGFerenzi wrote:

 

I asked why I should upgrade to LR 4 if he couldn't tell me it wouldn't change in a year ...

What are you talking about?  LR 3 didn't change other than getting free upgrades through LR 3.6.  Your camera changes, not Lightroom.

By the way, if the !@#$% camera makers would use DNG instead of their own proprietary formats, this sort of thing wouldn't be an issue.  It's the fact that Adobe has to constantly create new profiles and write new software to handle new cameras that creates this problem.

VG, here's the thing... what did you want the customer service rep to say?

Here are your two questions for the rep...

"I asked how this seems reasonable since my product is less than a year old and not subscription, but a product I purchased to own."

Whether or not its "reasonable" to you or to him or to anybody is really irrelevant.  Your camera is not directly supported by LR3... end of story.  What did you expect the rep to tell you?  It just is what it is... and as much as you may have "politely" requested a "reasonable" explanation... there ISN'T one for him to give you.

"I asked why I should upgrade to LR 4 if he couldn't tell me it wouldn't change in a year why not use someone besides Adobe."

Again, what did you expect him to say?  He's not the president of Adobe... he isn't the head of the LR design team... he doesn't call the shots... he doesn't have any insider knowledge on future products.  He's just a customer service rep!  How in the WORLD would he know what is or is not going to change in LR in the future?

Look... I understand that you didn't like the rep's attitude.  And maybe the rep was indeed out of line in the way he handled your call.  I wasn't there, so I don't know for sure.

But what I'm trying to show you is that the two questions you asked him were questions for which he truly couldn't provide you with an answer... or at least not the answers that you wanted to hear.  You had his back against the wall before he even picked up.

VGFerenzi wrote:

Again, my larger point was the fact that Adobe employees are rude and not of any help.

Based on the tone of what you've written here, I'm not sure that the Adobe employee wasn't provoked...

Solution?

Buy Capture One. Problem solved.

Adobe like all big companies is hell bent on building revenue, not

keeping customers happy, you should know this.

Saying that, I agree, £3k on a new camera and baulking at £45 for an

upgrade? Cheap.

Lightroom doesn't run on my 286 DOS system and I have a whopping 64KB of memory installed on it!

You are right VGFerenzi, Adobe is just plan rude to us old-timers stuck in the Stone Age!

You might get some sympathy if you had said, "I don't want to upgrade to LR4 yet because it still has a few bugs and some issues importing LR3 catalogs."

I have purchased and benefitted from every LR upgrade since LR 1.0 and I'm one really old geezer.

BTW - Did Canon give you a student upgrade price for your new Canon 5D MKIII?

Message was edited by: trshaner Sorry, it's a MK3!!!

Considering the amount of free reading material regarding support levels, hardware compatibility, and the number of times this question has been asked and answered in this and other forums and considering this is essentially a post the OP copied and pasted into two different threads, I don't think the deal is all that raw nor the comments unfair.

Expressing common sense, while it may 'protect', as some perceive, is necessary and instructive.

Ultimately this is a User to User forum. This post is better suited directed to an Adobe Customer Service forum or escalated via traditional support channels. If you post here with a rant, this is the risk you run.

howmanypigginnamesdoitry wrote:

 

You see, we all have our issues, with different companies.

Personally I don't have any particular issues with either Adobe or Phase One - I don't believe that this rules me out of having a view about either company.

I think the OP got a raw deal by being shouted down and some very unfair comments.

It wasn't so much what he said as how he said it; that, and his completely unrealistic and unreasonable criticism of some poor sod at the other end of the phone who - as should've been patently obvious - had zero chance of being able to answer the OP's demands for insight into Adobe product strategy and future plans.

The fact is, companies have to draw a line somewhere about how they price upgrades - nothing new about that, is there? - and if the OP had done a bit of research first, the alleged confrontation might not have been necessary in the first place.

There's no need to 'protect' Adobe in here, if people can't help, why not just refrain from replying?

FIrstly, I didn't get the memo telling me that I could only comment if I was in support of someone's - unfair - moaning; secondly, this isn't about protecting Adobe, it's about balance and fairness - I'm really big on that stuff.

Besides, I don't hold that simply agreeing with someone's crass complaining is "helping" anyway.